Skip to main content

About your Search

20121201
20121231
STATION
SFGTV 13
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
SFGTV
Dec 1, 2012 7:30pm PST
with the dpw they say it's still up for discussion. and they won't really give us a clear answer. it's been really frustrating and affected our business dramatically from where we can operate. that is one thing. then other thing i wanted to touch upon. there is a big common misconception that many people in restaurant associations and in building management have been making about that food trucks are not healthy. that is a big misconception about what current food trucks are able to produce. we are an indian food truck, punjabi and half of our menu is vegetarian and vegan. very healthy for you. so i think they are just kind of slowing stones to knock us down. that has been a little upsetting. if you look at the true ethnicity of all healthy food that have come out of the food trucks from filipino, vietnamese and korean, it's a healthy option for people in san francisco that is really a food capital of this nation and it's really welcoming and something that people should be aware of. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name i
SFGTV
Dec 1, 2012 8:00pm PST
to -- for those who tend to appeal, would appeal, because dpw is not -- dpw is not going to be issuing the notices. there is a 300' notice requirement and a 30-day, correct? yes. so that is already in place. so again, just what is maintaining is that should the permit be contested, again then again dpw can take into consideration the like food and 300 feet. those considerations are still being maintained. when we initially made the initial regulation, the consideration of the like food within 4 -- 300 feet. i think currently and andres, maybe you can come up to make sure this is clear. it's following the current formula retail requirements. my understanding is that formula retail mobile food vendors would not have to go through the conditional use process there. it's where the conditional use process requirements are set upon formula retail, which is in the n-c districts except for the places where formula retail is not allowed. >> it says before dpw even issued a permit there is a requirement that it be heard at the planning commission and in effect in the practical sense of wh
SFGTV
Dec 8, 2012 6:00am PST
in the best position because you are involved through the planning process or the dbi process that came to dpw because of this problem, but it seems like an odd situation. >> you are quite correct, supervisor wiener. it is a very odd situation because the inform we were provided initially from a 2010 survey showed the historic property line. okay, and what happened is again back in 2000 a portion of that was transferred, acquired and transferred to the city as right of way and that was not identified in the map. so it appears to be some form of error that happened at that stage that really no one caught on the development team. >> thank you. >> thank you. so there is no one from planing that's here and let's open this up for public comment if there are no other questions. supervisor wiener. >> yeah, i mean i'd be a bit uncomfortable acting on this without getting more information from planning and dbi, but i'm curious to hear public comments. >> and i'll just say up front as well that it's a confusing case, especially that we don't have planning here to explain more and i realize that even
SFGTV
Dec 3, 2012 1:30pm PST
inclined to request that dpw and planning come back, that we reject this resolution and that they come back with a street vacation rather than a major encroachment. i think that might be the best alternative course of action which you have outlined today here at the podium. so, mr. chair, i don't know if there's any more -- looks like supervisor wiener wants --. >> if we were, if the board was to reject the major encroachment are they able, i assume they could, if they wanted to, try to apply again in the future? >> yes, the applicant can reapply at some point in the future but normally on these rejections i believe they cannot reapply for one year. it still creates this problem where the building i believe was never final. they have a temporary certificate of occupancy that they are currently sitting on. i don't know right now. again, i leave that to the building department. from my understanding, based upon what the public have stated, that there are actually people residing in this building. >> and any negotiations to purchase the right of way that's been encroached on, that would
SFGTV
Dec 1, 2012 12:00am PST
, what agency, and you have all kinds of agencies. airport, sfmta, dpw, dbi, rec and park. it could be anything like a plumbing permit. and no one would know when the first approval is. so, the whole thing is very vague. and then you get this thing about someone says, oh, supervisor wiener says, this is improved noticing. well, in some of these instances in the legislation, if you read it very carefully as on page 2, lines 1, 12, i wasn't going to net pick in the weeds, but i have to noticing could be optional or none. * 11 because depending on the circumstances, some notices are not required and in some instances they are, so, you don't know if as it's optional or required. so this is going to turnout to be very vague. then you have this thing where you have these hearings. well, a hearing could be scheduled as on page 14 lines 7 through 8f, but it doesn't have to be held. it says it just has to be scheduled. so, the clerk can schedule a hearing, but then the next criteria is, well, how long after? well, there's no minimum so you don't even have a 14-day minimum to wait and then t
SFGTV
Dec 1, 2012 7:00am PST
recreation staff, but also dpw, the arts commission and of course the your parks. thank you. >> clerk calvillo: thank you, supervisor chu. supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: thank you. i actually just want to take a moment to share some words about howard wallace as well. and i want to really appreciate supervisor campos for just the beautiful story and talking about his life and his experience. he's someone i know that many of us will really sorely miss. howard was someone that i'm really grateful that i got an opportunity to get to know. and i met him actually in 2005, when several of us here in this room were involved in the san francisco people's organization. i just have an incredible level of respect for howard. he was always incredibly reasonable, but undeniably and staunchly progressive. he was vocal on many different issues but always open-minded. most permanen importantly he ben building coalition that was genuine and he was dedicated to that and he also loved to share stories. stories. i think many of us, with him at6 had to share, which are so important near us to continue
SFGTV
Dec 2, 2012 5:00am PST
knew trees and then to do my edition. * new trees first i'd go to dpw, go get my tree permit that nobody is paying attention. that action happened. then it comes to the planning commission. is it now that they could not file a c-e-q-a appeal because they didn't file it on the tree permit? >> again, assuming the tree permit is a discretionary action, we did a cad ex for it, the cad ex would only apply to the action if that's the only action that we had in place -- [multiple voices] >> if the information that we acted on was incomplete and there was a change to the project or further development of the project that changed those conditions, go back to go here. essentially the c-e-q-a clearance is on what we know and what we address. if we didn't address an aspect of the project because it wasn't put before us, then that becomes a new discretionary action subject to new environmental review subject to new appeals. i guess, i would imagine people would give the whole project -- i do think we're shortening the window. i guess the question is, then, what is the process currently? l
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)